BJA Advance Access originally published online on August 6, 2004
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2004 93(4):528-531; doi:10.1093/bja/aeh238
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia 2004
Comparison of the LMA-ProSealTM and LMA-ClassicTM in children
1 Department of Anaesthesia, Kanagawa Children's Medical Centre, 2-138-4 Mutsukawa, Minami-ku, Yokohama 232-8555, Japan. 2 Trauma and Critical Care Center, Teikyo University School of Medicine, 2-11-1 Kaga, Itabashi-ku, Tokyo, 173-8606 Japan
* Corresponding author. Present address: Department of Anaesthesia, Fujisawa City Hospital, 2-6-1 Fujisawa, Fujisawa City 251-8550, Japan. E-mail: epi{at}yk.rim.or.jp
Background. The LMA-ProSealTM is a new laryngeal mask airway with a rear cuff and drainage tube that allows a higher seal pressure than the LMA-ClassicTM for the same intra-cuff pressure, and it permits drainage of gastric secretions and access to the alimentary tract. The LMA-ProSeal can be used in children but it does not have a rear cuff. This study compared the LMA-ProSeal and the LMA-Classic in children for ease of insertion, airway sealing pressure and fibre-optic visualization.
Methods. Sixty ASA I–II children undergoing herniorrhaphy, orchiopexy or myringotomy were included. The patients were randomly assigned to size 2 LMA-ClassicTM or size 2 LMA-ProSeal groups for airway management. We assessed success rates at first attempt of insertion, airway sealing pressure, fibre-optic position, success rates of gastric tube placement and postoperative blood staining of the device, tongue–lip–dental trauma and hoarseness.
Results. There was no statistical difference between the two groups for the success rates at first attempt of insertion, airway sealing pressure and fibre-optic position. Gastric tube insertion was successful in 90% of cases in the LMA-ProSeal group. The LMA-Classic had a higher rate of postoperative blood staining, but there was no tongue–lip–dental trauma or hoarseness in either group.
Conclusion. We conclude that ease of insertion and airway sealing pressure are similar between the LMA-ProSeal and the LMA-Classic in children.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. Micaglio, R. Bonato, M. De Nardin, M. Parotto, D. Trevisanuto, V. Zanardo, N. Doglioni, and C. Ori Prospective, randomized comparison of ProSealTM and ClassicTM laryngeal mask airways in anaesthetized neonates and infants Br. J. Anaesth., August 1, 2009; 103(2): 263 - 267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Lopez-Gil, J. Brimacombe, L. Barragan, and C. Keller Bougie-guided insertion of the ProSealTM laryngeal mask airway has higher first attempt success rate than the digital technique in children Br. J. Anaesth., February 1, 2006; 96(2): 238 - 241. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Lopez-Gil, J. Brimacombe, and G. Garcia A randomized non-crossover study comparing the ProSealTM and ClassicTM laryngeal mask airway in anaesthetized children Br. J. Anaesth., December 1, 2005; 95(6): 827 - 830. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|